WorstCoachingEver Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Had to bring up some trades to this board to prove to the commish that people outside our league feel his rejections are meritless. Opinions wanted: Standard Performance Scoring 14 teams 9 Starters, 6 Bench Players 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 FLEX, 1 TE, 1 K, 1 D Trades made this week that got rejected. None involved me: Trade 1 Donovan McNabb and Fred Taylor for LaDanian Tomlinson and Johnny Knox. Reason for denying: Not equal value. Donovan and F Taylor are starting skill players while the other two are #2s at their spot. Trade 2 T.O. and Gaffney for V.Jax Reason for denying: Unequal value for a player not on a team / suspended. I've spoken to the Commish and tried to explain that you can't reject trades because you deem that to be of "unequal value." That's garbage. Trades are hardly ever equal in value as the whole concept of "value" is subjective. I also made the point that you should only reject trades when there is such a gross disparity in the trade (a stud RB like CJ for Gaffney) or there is evidence of collusion. Almost everyone in our league agrees with me (probably because they made the trades too!). Just wanted your opinions. Thanks in advance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Thread from today Should not turn down trades unless collusion is involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Well, you kinda need a rule for this, don't you think? FWIW - I can't see any reason to veto these trades based upon any reasonably objective standard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorstCoachingEver Posted September 17, 2010 Author Share Posted September 17, 2010 Thread from today Should not turn down trades unless collusion is involved. Saw that. I needed to post my own thread of the actual trades on here to make my argument to him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajfalcone Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Thread from today Should not turn down trades unless collusion is involved. yup. its all subjective and grey. No commish should even attempt valuing trades unless you want mutiny in your league. It divides and creates an un happy league enviroment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balzac Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 This made me laugh - I'm assuming that this is a first year commish? He clearly has no idea what he's doing if he's trying to shoot down trades based on his own determination of equal value. If two teams want to trade and there is no collusion, it's ludicrous to tell them that they can't. What percentage of trades are actually "equal value"? 50%? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Why are you in this league? Your commish is not good at being commish. I hope my bluntness does not offend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajfalcone Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 a way around this is just like the nfl draft. Where a player gets drafted in each round is given value with points. So you can determine a common ground later for trades. Obviously it would be difficult to match exact points durring trade so everyone must agree on an acceptable gap that they can live with. Say a 0 points to a 50 point gap. Nonetheless even this way is retarded and trades should just be left alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Knight Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Both trades are legit. In fact, given the makeup of my team's roster in my primary league, I would prefer the part of both trades that the commish ruled "less value". Regardless - unless there is collusion, the commish or gross ineptitude - (an owner dropping top players off his squad or trading an upper echelon stud for a bag of yesterday's trash), a commish should never insert himself into a trade or owner move. A commish who consistently violates this will destroy his league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL Fan Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 You should change your username to "WorstCommissionerEver" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorstCoachingEver Posted September 17, 2010 Author Share Posted September 17, 2010 You should change your username to "WorstCommissionerEver" But then I'd have to remove my picture of Jason Garrett! Thanks everyone for the responses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balzac Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 a way around this is just like the nfl draft. Where a player gets drafted in each round is given value with points. So you can determine a common ground later for trades. Obviously it would be difficult to match exact points durring trade so everyone must agree on an acceptable gap that they can live with. Say a 0 points to a 50 point gap. Nonetheless even this way is retarded and trades should just be left alone. dDaft slots become less and less of an indicator of value the further we get into the season, so I doubt this would work. Take Vick/Kolb for instance - their values now are nowhere near their ADPs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 But then I'd have to remove my picture of Jason Garrett! Thanks everyone for the responses. ... and replace it with a picture of Bud Selig. By the way, those trades are perfectly fine... your commish is an idiot. In fact, I think I'd rather have Knox/LT than McNabb/Taylor, in most formats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABearWithFurniture Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Loaf - "Is this a Yahoo league?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajfalcone Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 (edited) dDaft slots become less and less of an indicator of value the further we get into the season, so I doubt this would work. Take Vick/Kolb for instance - their values now are nowhere near their ADPs. true especially waiver wire pickups like Colston 4 years ago or even Brandon Jackson this year now starting. I guess you can have a governing site like the huddle that everyone agrees on. based on the huddles up to date value will be the deciding value for the said players in trade. tier 1 value 75 points, tier 2 value 50 points, tier 3 25 points, all other tiers 15 points. Nonetheless just leave trades alone Edited September 17, 2010 by ajfalcone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimm74 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 ADP should have nothing to do with trades period..not in Summer, Spring, Fall Winter, beginning of season or end of season. People value players differently. I would have quit this league after the commish rejected the first trade... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osu1322 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 In my leauge the commish doesn't have that kind of power. Our leauge rule reads that a majority (in our case 7 of the 12 teams) have to vote down a trade for it not to happen. This stops collusion transactions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 veto'ing a trade is absurd unless there is collusion... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 I have been commish of my main local for almost 10 years. I cant remember ever vetoing a trade. This guy is veto happy. You live and you learn as a league member. You either modify the rules or leave the league Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Why does your league even play its games? Your commish already knows exactly how many points each player will score, who will be injured, and when players will become activated. Just tell him to let everyone know who has won the league, award the money, and then you guys can all relax and enjoy watching football the rest of the season. If he happens to know who is going to win he SB, and by how much, it sure would be nice if he'd include all of us GBs here so that we can cash in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lkirc Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 In my leauge the commish doesn't have that kind of power. Our leauge rule reads that a majority (in our case 7 of the 12 teams) have to vote down a trade for it not to happen. This stops collusion transactions. I must warn you. Leagues that vote on trades don't usually last a long time. Everyone has an agenda and antimosity will rear its ugly head. All trades should be allowed. collusion can never be proven. Every owner will vote on the side that helps their own situation the most. Let them go through. If owners make lopsided trades, don't invite them back the next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Why stop at vetoing trades? I think your commish should set everybody's lineup every week too ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manofsteele Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 I'm in a 14 team keeper league and we have 2 Comissioners. Kinda like a checks and balances for moronic commissioners like the one you have! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Let people manage their own teams the way they want to manage them. Vetoing is ghey. If collusion is ever suspected, you can just choose not to invite the people back that you think cheated. I guess maybe I could make an argument for trading AP for a kicker as being something that should get vetoed, but collusion isn't always that obvious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 yup. its all subjective and ghey. Fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.